310.361/6–2551: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union 1

secret
niact

831. Re Malik’s Jun 23 broadcast and Dept statement same date carried Wireless Bulletin 152 Jun 24,2 we believe it desirable to limit our discussion at this stage to an attempt to clarify Malik’s statement on certain points. We do not wish to embark upon negots on the content of cease fire and armistice arrangements without knowing more about what Sov Govt had in mind on matters alluded to by Malik. Ur attitude, therefore, shld be one of seeking answers to questions in order that US Govt might understand what Malik in fact was saying; you shld not attempt to state views of US Govt on such points.

You shld seek clarification from Vishinsky or Gromyko (and USUN very discreetly from Malik) by means of the fol questions:

1.
Mr. Malik used the expression “the Sov peoples believe”. Are we entitled to believe that this is also the view of the Sov Govt? If so, [Page 554] is the Sov Govt prepared to lend its support to taking of steps toward a peaceful settlement?
2.
Is there any special significance to the phrase “a cease fire and an armistice”? What does Mr. Malik have in mind in appearing to draw a distinction between the two? Does this refer to a development of peaceful arrangements by stages? Does it contemplate provisions for assurance against the resumption of hostilities, as for example, by supervision of any cease fire or armistice arrangement?
3.
What is the significance of the expression “to enter on the path of a peaceful settlement of the Korean question”? Does the Sov Govt have any specific steps in mind? If so, what precise arrangements do they envisage?
4.
Does the Sov Govt know whether Mr. Malik’s statement represents the view of the authorities in Peiping? If not, how does Sov Govt suggest views of Peiping be ascertained?
5.
Shld one understand Mr. Malik’s statement to mean that the Sov Govt is prepared to support a mtg of reps of the opposing commands in the field to discuss arrangements for a cease fire and an armistice which wld contain adequate assurances against renewal of hostilities?

Acheson
  1. This telegram was repeated to the U.S. Mission at the United Nations as 1018.
  2. The statement referred to is that printed in the editorial note, p. 546.